 | | Re: Clipping / CCW / CW / INVERT
|
|
Isn't a CLIPPING tag redundant? Programs should always clip when drawing an opaque part, and never clip when drawing a transparent part. -Gary (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Comprehensive meta-command list
|
|
Lars C. Hassing wrote in message <939391242.591663@ns.cci.dk>... (...) benefit. (...) I'm not sure I follow. The rendering engine will always assume an implied INVERT whenever it encounters a negative orientation matrix determinant to cancel the (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clipping / CCW / CW / INVERT
|
|
(...) I put in WINDING UNKNOWN because it explicitly states that the winding is unknown (and probably bad). This way, you can effectively disable clipping for a particular section of (unchecked) code, without having to force clipping back on at the (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clipping / CCW / CW / INVERT
|
|
(...) No, when I look at the images I see real alpha-blended surfaces :) I've tried to turn backface culling in the transparent parts and they looked very ugly, it's better to draw everything in those cases. (...) Just a note to correct the (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Track parts naming scheme survey
|
|
(...) My 12V trains don't move when I put them on the 4.5V-only track :) Now seriously, maybe we could drop the "4.5" from the name and replace it with "old" but I don't think it's going to be a good idea. Of course we'd have to keep the current (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clipping / CCW / CW / INVERT
|
|
(...) I don't need the WINDING UNKNOWN, since it's redundant with CLIPPING OFF. When clipping is OFF you don't care the state of the winding. I am curious, what is CLIPPING -1 ? an UNKNOWN, CLIPPING when not found is assumed as OFF (the safe side), (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clipping / CCW / CW / INVERT
|
|
(...) touche'! (...) Not exactly! If the color has any transparency, force CLIPPING OFF, irrespective of what the file TAGS inform. (SIDE NOTE) when using the tag 0 CLIPPING ON you are not informing the program that it MUST do clipping, but instead (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Comprehensive meta-command list
|
|
(...) I think that the ideia here is: - Assume any file you reference as CCW WINDING (assuming CCW as default) - Assume any file as it's polygonal faces facing outward (if applicable) - Every time you want a diferent orientation, just use the INVERT (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clipping / CCW / CW / INVERT
|
|
On Wed, 6 Oct 1999 18:15:40 GMT, Rui Martins <Rui.Martins@link.pt> wrote: Follow-up note: the more I look at this, the more I like using WINDING / CLIPPING instead of FACE. For reasons listed by Rui, for more flexibility, for the ability to enable (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clipping / CCW / CW / INVERT
|
|
(...) No, thank you! (...) I don't know if I knew you knew that, but I was almost positive you knew that. And I knew most everyone else knew that, but I wasn't sure absolutely everyone knew that. ;) (...) Right. New programs may handle transparency (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clipping / CCW / CW / INVERT
|
|
(...) I was just pointing out that the clippability of transparent surfaces is a feature of the rendering program, and shouldn't be assumed in the description language. Steve (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: CW/CCW, vertex sequence, co-planar, convex
|
|
(...) Checking the order of points in a file should not depend on checking the inversion or subfiles for the file. That's why we've been talking about the 0 FACE UNKNOWN -- so parts of files can be fixed, even if the entire file can't be addressed. (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Comprehensive meta-command list
|
|
Gary Williams wrote in message ... (...) "...not dependent on any other file..." Well, I hope you agree that files depend on the inside/outside-definition of subfiles? Otherwise a file wouldn't know whether or not to use the INVERT. /Lars (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Comprehensive meta-command list
|
|
Lars C. Hassing wrote in message <939367581.966085@ns.cci.dk>... (...) In addition to being easier to comprehend, it has the advantage that each part and primitive file only has to concern itself with its own vertex order, and is not dependent on (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clipping / CCW / CW / INVERT
|
|
Rui Martins wrote in message ... (...) You mean six of one, half a dozen of the other. :) (...) it (...) Using 0 FACE CW|CCW|DS|UNKNOWN will also keep backward compatibility. Either way though, some quadrilaterals will need to be manually tweaked (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Track parts naming scheme survey
|
|
Manfred: (...) Why is it labeled "4.5V"? It works quite fine for 12V trains too (just to make sure we get a long discussion :-). (...) Yes. We might want to remember the 12V power tracks too. (...) Actually I distinguish between "unpowered", "12V", (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Track parts naming scheme survey
|
|
Hello all We have another fine naming issue on our hand, which is always good for a lively discussion tread :-) The issue is about the parts from the group "Train Track 4.5V". I believe two different types are known here: 1- the oldest "Blue" type (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: CW/CCW, vertex sequence, co-planar, convex
|
|
Jacob Sparre Andersen wrote in message ... (...) Certified primitives are harmless when used by old uncertified parts, so there's no need to create special certified versions. And in stead of fixing parts to reference the new names, you might just (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clipping / CCW / CW / INVERT
|
|
(...) I agree with this. (...) that' wright, a program supporting transparent colors correctly (using alpha blending) would do this just wright. A 3D card here would do wounders ! (did I spell that wright?) (...) Agreeing again! Rui Martins (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Clipping / CCW / CW / INVERT
|
|
(...) Thanks! (...) I knew that ! ;) (...) LDraw doesn't, but this specification is for new Programs which are backwards compatible with Ldraw, but with a bunch of new enhancements. Check the instructions of any LEGO MODEL and you will see an (...) (25 years ago, 8-Oct-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
